Posted
by
timothy
on Friday June 04, 2010 @06:48PM
from the 5-inch-abs dept.

adeelarshad82 writes "Dell Streak, the Android-based 5-inch tablet (which has also been called out as a smartphone) is set to ship starting in July, both from a US carrier and direct on Dell.com for $500. Even though Dell has not disclosed the name of the carrier, some experts believe that it will be AT&T because the Streak is a 3G GSM 850/1900 device and AT&T is the only major US carrier that supports those frequency bands. According to a hands-on, Streak is a sharp-looking device with a black front and candy-apple red back that unfortunately shows fingerprints easily. On the upside, Streak's curved body is comfortable to hold. Streak runs a customized version of Android 1.6, but Android aficionados will have to get used to the unusual button layout. Its 800x480-pixel screen makes images look tight, and web pages will benefit from the horizontal resolution. The 1 GHz Qualcomm Snapdragon processor, the same as in the HTC Incredible and Sprint EVO 4G, functions snappily. There's a 5-megapixel camera on the back, a VGA camera for video calling on the front, and a MicroSD memory card slot under the back cover."

Y'know sharp like the edges of a Archos MP3 brick when the ipod came out. Holding one of these huge things to your head to talk will have everyone laughing like it was an episode of Bean. This will get the brown Zune prize for 2010.

Streak is a 3G GSM 850/1900 device and AT&T is the only major US carrier that supports those frequency bands.

Yeah.... except that tons [wikipedia.org] of Android 3G GSM 850/900/1800/1900 devices built by HTC (desire, dream, hero, magic, passion) are on the market right now, and I don't believe any of them are sold via AT&T. I know the passion is designed to work on AT&T's network, but they don't sell it.

So what carrier is it actually selling all of those? Damn, I can't remember their name, but I pay them $75/mo for unlimited minutes and unlimited data [wsj.com].

Bah who cares. Whoever they are, they must not be a major US c [wikipedia.org]

If they were to privatize Dell, the stockholders would more than likely make out like bandits as the offer has to be accepted by the majority of shareholders which generally means the offer is very favourable to the shareholders.

Speculation about carrier based on the frequencies is at best guesswork, because new radios can be swapped into the design very easily. Most radio chipset manufacturers can give you a radio with the same pin-outs and die size for any flavor of cell system you want to talk to, and the programming interfaces are all standardized as well.

Speculation about carrier based on the frequencies is at best guesswork, because new radios can be swapped into the design very easily. Most radio chipset manufacturers can give you a radio with the same pin-outs and die size for any flavor of cell system you want to talk to, and the programming interfaces are all standardized as well.

It does seem strange it's only got 1.6 on it. Maybe it'll be upgraded later but the lack of a keyboard is a deal breaker for me.I really wish phone makers would think more about functionality rather then appearances.

This is the problem with trying to faux-innovate by creating an "experience".

For starters, Dell is shit at it. Second of all, you spend so long tailoring it to the firmware version you started it on that it's now obsolete and the default experience is a million times better anyway.

IMHO Dell needs to differentiate themselves in two ways:

1) By a "build your own smartphone" model using a couple of different form factors (tablet, slider, flip) with commodity snap in parts that are user customizable (screen tech/screen size/flash space/CPU+GPU combo/camera) that would allow them to deliver any phone in any segment at any price point.2) Keeping up with the latest version of Android and providing the latest default Android experience as soon as possible. Make a generic firmware, stuff it with all the drivers you might need for all of the hardware used in the different combinations and release it quick. Sell on volume, sell on having the latest and greatest Android features available to customers a week after the general release and laugh at HTC promising firmware updates at some undetermined point in the future.

If you give people what they want and quickly you won't have to differentiate yourself with all of this experience wank. You can just sell them whatever they want and sell them by the truckload because you're DELL. When people just want a laptop they jump on Dell's website, price one up, it's cheap as chips and they buy it. Just do the same damn thing with smartphones already.

By a "build your own smartphone" model using a couple of different form factors (tablet, slider, flip) with commodity snap in parts that are user customizable (screen tech/screen size/flash space/CPU+GPU combo/camera) that would allow them to deliver any phone in any segment at any price point.

Ever notice how phones and tablets tend to have SoC's from 6-12 months ago? Like the Snapdragon here when they've already got Snapdragon II running or the Droid/Pre/iPhone/Pod/Pad's A8 when the A9 has been out for a while and they are already flogging the A10 at Computex? A device that small has to be drawn out months in advance so all the components can be fabricated and any glitches in the assembly process ironed out. This isn't like plugging a PCI card into a motherboard -- almost every component is a custom part and every cubic millimeter of the device is taken.

Make a generic firmware, stuff it with all the drivers you might need for all of the hardware used in the different combinations and release it quick.

I don't know about the Android ecosystem but I used to be into WinMo hacking (before the birth of Android and the death of my free time )and this was straight impossible. Even the bootstrap sequence varied from phone to phone, as did vital kernel settings, radio settings and really just about everything. I would not be at all surprised if this was simply impossible.

Also, in the official world, you have to get validation from the OEM, the carriers and the regulatory agencies (if you touched the baseband) before pushing firmware. That alone takes time, plus they might bump it back to you if they don't like it.

Well, when you have 5 releases in less than a year, you can't really expect new devices to be using the latest version. The latest version of Android was released about two weeks ago. How many months did it take after Windows Vista was released before most new computers were shipping with it included? And that's a minor change. I mean it's big, but any PC they were making to run XP could run Vista too. Android's not so simple.

While it is true that 2.0 was only released a month after 1.6, I would imagine the

How many months did it take after Windows Vista was released before most new computers were shipping with it included?

That is actually a negative number, at least -6 months if not less. MS created those infamous "Vista Ready" and "Vista Capable" classifications, and you could buy a PC with XP and with a free upgrade certificate. I got a couple of those myself, and redeemed them. MS may not know how to write good software, but they sure know how to sell what they write.

I guess "Release early, release often" is not a proper strategy here. I suspect Google managers are simply not mature enough (too young, in other words) to understand the business needs and do what is right.

I disagree. I mean in a year or two I would imagine that development will naturally slow down a bit. But their options right now are to either release frequently and have some fragmentation, or release rarely and have people stuck on very old releases that don't have the features they want. Remember all the complaints about how long it took Apple to get MMS on the iPhone? Besides, as far as Google is concerned, implementing the latest version isn't really their problem.

Releasing a product in commercial space requires stability. Sure, you can't have everything in the release 1.0, but every release must be a solid product. If you look back, each DOS release was fine; most Windows releases were OK (as Windows goes,) and IIRC even OS/2 releases were reasonably mature.

The major point here is to avoid the upgrade treadmill. I can understand frequent upgrades if they are seamless. But in Android they are not. Each OEM has to customize a base Android system to their hardware, and a handheld thing can have 10-20 different hardware items to worry about - the CPU itself, the display controller, the touch controller, the battery charge controller, WiFi, Ethernet, BT, compass, GPS... so it's a lot of work to the OEM to upgrade from 1.x to 1.(x+1). If you make them do it often they just say "stuff it, we won't be upgrading anything" and then you are stuck. In my work I occasionally have to upgrade frameworks. Qt offers a great example, especially when 3.x to 4.x transition changed *everything* and required rewrite of major pieces of code. Such an upgrade is often out of consideration even - the library pieces then get checked in along with your sources, and that's that.

So IMO regardless of what Google wants to do, what they are doing is not working. Google people just don't understand what their releases are doing to the industry. Imagine yourself an OEM that plans a gizmo. If you pick Android you start development one day and never end, until the product is EOLed. That is hardly a winning strategy. If I were such an OEM I'd rather pick a no-name OS that at least allows me to build a product and let it be. If my product doesn't report its OS version I'm OK. If my product reports that it's Android x.y then it's already bad news - there is already a newer release by Google, and who will buy my gizmo then? Business-wise, Google is on a losing path here.

Besides, as far as Google is concerned, implementing the latest version isn't really their problem.

I'm afraid you are right and Googlers indeed harbor that foolish idea. But that very fact *is* their problem. They have enough cash to play ostrich for a few years, but the reality couldn't care less about what Google thinks. Reality deals with things that exist.

Quite likely the issue is that Google is a web company, and in that world new software is almost continuously rolled out.

So the decision makers don't have any person real-world experience with commercial devices containing firmware; which is very difficult to upgrade once it leaves the factory. (at least major version changes, for the reason you noted)

This actually makes me wonder if Meego will be a sleeper. Nokia IS a phone company, so they understand that world. Trolltech has been playing with real world customers in the embedded world for a long time.

Intel is in a different world, but I expect they are providing more funding than SW development. They will have decision making clout. But Intel is a hardware company, run by hardware engineers. And those guys think that once something goes out the door it's frozen forever. Very different then the Google web-based, "let's try this for a few hours in Ohio, and we can always roll it back if it doesn't work" way of thinking.

It's not so much about "thinking" but about one's own decades of personal experience, which affects how we see the world and what decisions we'll tend to make.

There are of course many factors which go into mass market acceptance, so I would not want to make any bets just yet about a dominant phone/tablet OS 5 years from now. But it will be interesting to watch.

Yes, it's hardly surprising that "reality" shows Android overtook iPhone in the last quarter, when Verizon were running a 2 for 1 on Android handsets, and the iPhone sales slumped because the new iPhone is coming out in June/July 2010.

I'm as excited as anyone else that Android is doing well, but you might want to check the reality that you are ignoring.

I take it reality gets to ignore that android phones have overtaken iphones in sales in the last quarter?

You need to consider that phones that were sold in last quarter started in design a year ago. I don't think OEMs were cognizant of the rapid pace of Android development at that time. Android offered them a good entry path into a high-end smartphone market. However once OEMs discover the pain of endless upgrades that may change. Another problem is that it's not trivial to even upgrade an OS on a handse

If I buy a device that is advertised as a computer, I expect that I control the software aspect of it, OS included.

Sorry, a phone is not a general purpose computer. You can't control the software aspect of it without having access to the hardware aspect, and that is something you aren't going to get (from most OEMs, at least) - unless you want to buy a design from the OEM for some spare change like $100M or more. It's better to see the phone (or iPad) as a specialized device that also can run some simple

Indeed. It reminds me of how I came to hate the Newton for its size (among other reason): too big to put in your pocket, too small to serve as a serious device for reading or writing.

I own an HTC Hero (named "Dudley"; anybody get the joke?) with a 3.2" screen. For me, that's the perfect size — any bigger or smaller and it's a literal pain to use. (My left hand spasms if I even think about some of the other phones I've used.) If they're going to make a device bigger, it needs to be a lot bigger, so that there's enough screen real-estate for serious business.

Unfortunately, you can't specify an arbitrary size for an LCD panel: you have to go with whatever the manufacturers find it worthwhile to set up production lines for. (That's why monitor makers switched to landscape layout at the same time as the switch to digital mandated it for TVs.) Maybe if thousands of people went to the window and yelled "I'm as mad as hell, and I want an 8x8 LCD!"

Of course, when people talk about Android fragmentation, they don't know it, but they're really talking about the NDK. If you stick to Java your program is fairly easy to keep working across versions. If you use the NDK, it's graphics programming in the late '90s again with a ton of different GPUs and odd CPU quirks to deal with.

So in other words, Android is a commercial success, but is poorly designed?

I've been programming embedded devices (including Linux systems using OpenEmbedded, etc), desktop systems from PCI drivers to GUIs for 20 years, so I understand the issues, but I haven't studied the Android architecture yet.

So I don't understand why this is such an issue. Sounds worse than a standard Linux distribution. Which again makes me wonder if Meego has a better chance long term because a lot of the KDE/Qt developers are invol

There is no such thing as an Android Tablet. Google doesn't officially make an OS for tablets yet, they're holding off on ChromeOS for that. These are just hackjobs by manufacturers trying to get in on the iPad hype.

> There is no such thing as an Android Tablet. Google doesn't officially make an OS for tablets yet,

If someone puts Android on a tablet then at that point you can say that Google officially makes an OS for tablets. What Google intends to do, or where it expects an OS to run is neither here nor there.

No, because Google doesn't support it. Hence why the first wave of these devices are basically over sized phones, that's the only way Google will let them access the Android Market and the Google Apps.

What's the difference between a tablet and a netbook apart from a physical keyboard? Why do they need completely different operating systems?

Never having used either of these OSs, my impression of Android is pretty favourable - it's like a open iPhone OS - whereas my impression of Chrome is that it's some ridiculous attempt to enable a vision of cloud computing (using Google's services) and pushing that service-as-a-platform idea down people's throats, than having a good operating system that is principally

Chrome is about always on tracking for the push of personalised advertising. You will always be leaking persistent, uniquely identifiable data back to google from cookies down to hardware.
Unlike MS, your data might be safer over time, unlike Apple you can have more flexibility in what you code.

If you want a device that size, chances are you'll also what the physical keyboard, well otherwise your probably writing kanji.

I'm also curious why people are attracted to Android. I've found that my N900 definitely has limitations, especially no printing. Yeah, I could always install cups and ghostscript just like Linux, but I'd need to micromanage the ghostscript driver installation, well plus the apps don't offer print buttons. How does printing work on Android?

I'm also not terribly happy with x11vnc on the N900. It'd rock if my phone's screen would just pop up on my desktop, but x11vnc is unbearably slow over wifi, making only usb networking pleasent for sharing screens. I'm obviously very happy the N900 has pdflatex svn, git, and rsync, but I've only actually used rsync. Android must have an rsync implementation, but what about svn and git?

Right, because the fact that there have been Internet Tablets [wikipedia.org] with a similar size and form for as long as the iPhone has been on the market doesn't matter? If it doesn't have the Apple logo on it, it doesn't exist? Only Apple is allowed to define "Tablet"? I have no idea what you're basing your opinion on, but it doesn't seem to match the facts.

On the other hand, I totally agree that this doesn't seem to stand out from the other Android and Maemo systems available, and I'm not sure why anyone would bothe

An N900 running Maemo is way more fun.. and MeeGo will be more fun in the future.

In fact, I see tremendous value in pushing the screen real-estate for phones, sure some people won't buy the bigger phone, but you might hit that optimal size for many people.

That said, you'll never break into a larger screen size using only a virtual keyboard. Anyone who'll buy the oversized phone will require the real keyboard for more computer like functionality, like writing emails.

That said, you'll never break into a larger screen size using only a virtual keyboard. Anyone who'll buy the oversized phone will require the real keyboard for more computer like functionality, like writing emails.

Yeah, the iPad hasn't sold at all...

There seem to be two camps. One who is happy with the 95% of what the iPad can do. And the other who is all pissed off that it isn't a full laptop. Maybe this is a new device category? (and there are ways to use a keyboard with an iPad, when needed; and that should work for similar Android/otherOS tablets as well)

But you might be able to write your own code for it, play your own music on it, not have your literature deleted/banned/rejected ect.
Dell might just give you something MS, Apple and Amazon never will, a really computer in a small form factor at a fair price.
Buy an unlocked unit and sign up for any provider you like, if you have coverage.
Make your own video clips, watch movies, read text, make calls, surf the web with expected functionality.
Dell might just put the fun back into handheld computing again o

What are the earmarks of a true tablet? Is it size? I think a 5-inch screen is too small to be called a tablet. It's large enough to watch movies and fill the Android interface with app icons, but you still have to type with your thumbs. In my opinion, tablets are supposed to fill in for laptops when you don't want the bulk of a screen and physical keyboard. The iPad fits that model.

I look at it another way: The iPad is so big that it doesn't fit in my pocket, so I need to carry it in a case, so I may as well carry a laptop and get a proper keyboard and the myriad of missing iPad features that we've all been over. And I still have to carry a phone, too.

I don't know about the Streak yet, but it does seem to me that it would still be pocket-sized and would give me a larger screen than my phone. For someone who needs a phone, but uses it more for texting and surfing, it could be very suit

The iPad is so big that it doesn't fit in my pocket, so I need to carry it in a case, so I may as well carry a laptop

That's where you lost me.

Because a laptop doesn't need a case. It needs a bags, with accessories and so on.

The iPad has long enough battery life you don't need to pack power cords "just in case", and really have nothing else to bring with it. It's still much more portable than a laptop and easier to drag around an office or into meetings.

Define "10 hour battery life" for me-- is that claimed, or based on "moderate usage", or? And how moderate is moderate, if that's it?

Because I've never seen a laptop which got anywhere near the claimed battery life with what I consider "moderate" usage... and most die out from 2 to 4 hours of continual usage. Let alone if you're doing something intense, i.e. watching a video. I may be wrong: I've never used a netbook, and maybe these netbook makers finally managed (since I stopped using laptops a few years

Here's a link [netbookreviews.net] showing some good options. Looks like the best option show (that this report looked at, in 2009) was an MSI Wind at 11 hours light use and 7ish hours stressful use. I would hope there's a few more better options these days. Still, I think you have much more potential with a netbook, while giving up little (and for less money).

And further add to the discussion, as long as it requires having some sort of "bag" that bag probably has room for other common things that people carry around like writing implements, paper, books, etc. Making the statement that you don't need a case for an iPad is kind of like saying you don't need a briefcase for your papers. Sure, you could walk around with a couple of file folders tucked under your arm, but a briefcase is a lot more convenient. (If you're some sort of hipster who is morally opposed

Bag, case, whatever. Let's abstract this down to what the problem is: The iPad means I still have to use a hand to carry it, whether holding it, having it under my arm, in a bag, case, whatever. It's the same problem in that sense as a laptop.

You are seriously stretching the similarity here. The iPad is significantly more portable than a notebook (even a thin 13" notebook, like a MacBook Pro). Even if you ignore the process of disconnecting the cords and putting it into a bag or sleeve as well as carrying any accessories (like power adapter), and just focus on transporting it, the experience is not even remotely comperable.

The only notebooks I would consider anything close to similar to carrying an iPad is either a MacBook Air, or one of the thinner netbooks.

The differences are then down to weight. I can carry my laptop just fine. In the bag. With a power charger. So weight isn't a problem.

Except then you're now toting a bag around. Having commuted with notebooks, netbooks, iPads, and iPhones, I can tell you there's a very noticeable difference between each of them. The difference between an iPhone and an iPad is comparable in magnitude to the difference between an iPad and a small (13") notebook.

I think you need to take a closer look at the latest generation of CULV ultra-portables. I get 8 hours of battery life out of my Core2, which means most days I simply take the laptop and a bluetooth mouse in a neoprine bag. If you want a larger laptop (10"-12") you can stretch the battery life out to 10-12 hours.

Longer battery life does indeed completely change usage, but this is not limited to the iPad.

I think you need to take a closer look at the latest generation of CULV ultra-portables. I get 8 hours of battery life out of my Core2, which means most days I simply take the laptop and a bluetooth mouse in a neoprine bag. If you want a larger laptop (10"-12") you can stretch the battery life out to 10-12 hours.

Are you replying to me? I never said anything about notebooks and battery life. And "CULV ultra-portables" are not exactly your typical notebook.

But since you brought it up, you're not being very honest. Long battery life isn't normal for PC notebooks, unless you opt for extra-large batteries. Even then, you generally have to run with things set to a notably lower setting, and avoid any heavy processing, and still fall far short of the iPad's battery life.

Yes, an iPad is more portable. The question is whether it is more portable enough.

The first question is whether the iPad is more portable, and it is. Only then does the second question come into play. The first question is pretty much universally true. The second question is a matter of opinion. An opinion which I'm highly confident that you do not share with the majority of people. I'm not saying that invalidates your opinion. On the contrary, your opinion is quite valid for you. I'm just pointing out the alternate, more prevalent view.

To put it another way, when would I use an iPad that I couldn't use a laptop?

In short you get a very large, sturdy and well made ultra portable and for not much more weight or form factor than an iPadwith the power to run Adobe Acrobat, Lotus Notes, VPN software, Office, Photoshop etc.

Most people don't particularly care about the things that a notebook can do that an iPad can't. Your list, however, is fairly ignorant.

1. Adobe Acrobat - iPad can read and create PDFs. The additional features that Acrobat can do are not important to the vast majority of people.2. Lotus Notes - is coming to iPad, but even so, the vast majority of people do not even know Lotus Notes exists, let alone need it.3. VPN software - iPad supports VPN connections, but yet again, most people don't need this.4. Office

Sony Ericsson did that as well for there Android smart-phone: create a customised experience on top Android 1.6. Probably to create a “unique selling point”. When they where finished with tweaking the Donut everybody already had a 2nd Eclair;-) . Sony at least promised everybody to supply Eclairs later in September:ROFL:

I hope they learn the hard way that the best “unique selling point” is the having the new version ready at max one month after release day. In the mean time I have

I bought a Nokia N900 the other day, mostly the same specifications but probably a tad more open than Android. I don't think it's a slippery slope but you are right about the blurred distinction. It's not really a phone, not a laptop, not a tablet, not a PDA... I think maybe it's all of them, only a lot smaller.

Just got the EVO today, and while it isn't as large as the Dell Streak, it is significantly larger than most smartphones in its class. One of the things I noticed was that although it's a joy to type on, it isn't so nice holding it up to your ear. It feels bulky holding it up against your head - however I can still use a headset and keep the device in my pocket. The significantly larger size of Dell means that a.) I wont be able to keep it up to my head without it feeling awkward, and b.) I wont be able to keep it in my pocket and use a headset. I can't see a reason to want a device of this size. It's at the perfectly wrong size, in fact.

It's a good size for me because I spend very little time talking on the phone. I don't mind feeling awkward for a couple minutes when I actually would have to call someone. most of the time I browse and text/IM, and this will allow me to do so while still able to fit in my pocket. unlike that sony netbook...

I've seen a few devices of this size (the Archos 7 comes to mind; and I've seen them on the internet, not in person, mind you) and I think it's interesting to watch the industry try to figure out the correct form factor for this new niche that is emerging. Obviously it is going to be something larger than a cellphone and smaller than a laptop -- but what, exactly?

This Dell Streak, I think, is the exact wrong size. It's quite a bit larger than a phone, and it doesn't look like something that you want to carry around all day in your pant pocket. One of the reason cellphones have become so popular is because they are so small (and light-weight). Remember that for several years, the major thing about cellphones is that they were getting smaller and smaller? Compare a phone from, say, 2000, with a phone from today. Why would anyone want to reverse direction on that? It's too large for a phone.

On the opposite end, it looks too small to do any actual work. A netbook-sized screen is good for emails and browsing, but it's not very useful for doing serious business. And this thing is much smaller than a netbook. I don't think that's the aim, of course -- I think it's more aimed to the niche that the iPod targets; gaming, "always-on" style internet access, etc.. But I have to wonder if the device is too small for these things, as well. I think it might very well be.

But the overwhelming thing we seem to be seeing is that there are plethora of devices being released, each being in some significant way different from the next; companies are trying to find out what consumers want in a device like this. Maybe Apple has proven it with the iPad, given its popularity; they did that with the iPod, and now the market is full of MP3 players which are essentially iPod clones. But remember when MP3 players were first coming to market, there were many different form factors, many different storage devices (Sony had that thing with the mini CDs, for example), until it became clear what consumers want. The same thing should/will happen here; and I believe it's quite possible it's already happened with the iPad, and anyone making anything substantially different will wind up falling behind.

I like the N810 form factor a lot. I carry mine in a hip pouch -- not in a pocket, admittedly, but I've never liked to carry a phone in my pocket either. The Streak looks slightly too large to me -- it's significantly thinner, but that doesn't really make that much difference.

Nokia obviously thought the N810 was too big since the N900 is smaller, but the smaller size forces compromises in the slide-out keyboard design, besides just making the screen a little harder to read.

I completely agree about the slide out keyboard. I had a BB Curve a while ago, and I loved the hard keys. I moved to the BB storm because I desired a touch screen (I feel like a touch screen enables a smartphone to be anything, since it can turn the UI into anything), which was nice, but I greatly missed the hardkeys when typing out a necessarily long email while on the go. I moved to the Palm Pre Plus largely for this feature, and I absolutely love it.

My phone in 2000 was smaller than my Droid. The droid is far better in every way.

The iPad is going to be just one of many tablets much like the iPhone is just one of many smartphones. RIM sells more smartphones than iphone or android and it would not be surprising to see hp do something similar in the tablet segment.

My phone in 2000 was smaller than my Droid. The droid is far better in every way.

Exactly. If it's just a flip phone, then yes, smaller is better. However, now that we have smartphones (which are really just pocket computers that also are capable of making phone calls) with touch screens, it's necessary and desirable to have a larger phone so that you have a larger screen to make it easier to select what you want through the touch interface and to make it easier to read on without excessive scrolling.

"Too large for a phone" is a matter of opinion. This is exactly the size of phone I've been waiting for. I want as large a screen as possible, without making it impossible to hold it to my ear for my (very occasional) voice calls, or conveniently carry it in a holster or (less often) a pocket.

For me, a phone being tiny is of little value. Give me vast amounts of screen space, a large physical keyboard with hard keys with spacing and some travel distance, and a huge battery that won't run out even if I sp

I have an iPhone now (after bailing on my G1 after a month) and I'm thinking of this type of large display phone when my contract is up this December. After using a 3.5" 3x2 screen, I can appreciate wanting a much larger one. Some have said the Dell is too big - it's too small to do real work on, but yet too big to fit comfortably in your pocket (or up to your head if you don't have bluetooth handy). This may be true, but the larger form factor (say a screen at least 4.7" - the Dell Streak was often quot

Hate to do this, but:
1. Too big to be a good phone, too small and slow to be anything else.
2. Resolution is no good for a "tablet."
3. AT&T blows.
4. Many people still hate touch-screen keyboards.
5. Android 1.6. Are you serious? No, really. You are serious? Oh. Wow. And it's a non-standard version. M'kay.

Haven't seen one yet, don't need to. The Streak will be another big brown streak for AT&T and Dell. FAIL

AT&T junk tends to work on Tmobile, so here's hoping. I am a big fan of physical keyboards, but I can live with a shitty onscreen keyboard if it's on a 5" screen. The fact that it supports voice over traditional cellphone networks is a plus too, for when I absolutely have to make or receive a phone call. I'm guessing Skype service is in the cards for this one. I think a 5.5" screen would have been better but it's a great start. $500 might be a little steep though, Dell. Drop it down to $350 or $400 and

If you can hold the whole thing in one hand and fit it in a shirt pocket and it has a speaker at top and mic at bottom that is a phone. Sheesh.

The stupidest part of them calling it a tablet is at $500 it costs more than an iPad, which has a bigger screen, more storage, glass and aluminum instead of plastic, twice or more bettery life, and much more sophisticated software, including native C apps. Why invite that comparison? If you just call it a phone you see its reason for being is for those who want a big

Bah, was looking forward to this. For me, that form factor is fantastic.But 1.6 and a Dell 'experience' UI? Oh dear Dell.I'm not a fan of the soft-touch buttons either, prefer to have solid buttons to press for home/back. They're very fiddly on the NexusOne, the HTC Desire's button configuration is alot better.And the power button on the top near the camera? Hmm... Odd choice. Should be more obvious (unless you can configure the Camera button to power up!)In the breakdowns of the hardware, not seen wher

bah, youre all a bunch of crabby old men. almost everyone thats tried this device has fallen in love with it. the resolution is not low. i remember using 800x600 on a 14 inch monitor. this is gonna be very small pixels on this device. also it comes out at the end of july in north america with an android 2.2 update in september. thats less than 2 months to wait, not a big deal. it fits in a pants pocket. they made it as big as they could while still being pocketable. thats the magic size for me. the htc hd2

Damn -- it's first concern in half the mobile-hardware reviews these days. Do these people actually turn the phone on or just hang it around their necks as jewelry? Wipe the scary prints off on your overpriced shirt awready.